SIR: Given that the Report of the Scientific Committee on Tobacco & Health (SCOTH) contains no original research and merely lists the catalogue of spurious claims made against smokers, one has to ask whether this anti-smoker utopian wishlist is the correct basis on which to make public policy.

In fact the Department of Health accepts SCOTH as only being the opinions of scientists and not a blueprint for any legislation. Since many of those involved in preparing the report are well-known for their anti-smoking research and opinions, the contents are hardly surprising. In fact the recommendations read like a 'give us a job' list, which calls for more training programmes and yet more studies.

The only new research looking at the effects on non-smokers from exposure to environmental tobacco smoke is that conducted by the World Health Organisation (WHO). This study, the largest ever carried out in Europe, gathered data from 12 study centres across Europe (including the UK) over a 10-year period. According to advance press covering it concludes that the risk to non-smokers is not statistically significant and this finding is accepted by leading anti-smoker Sir Richard Doll.

The call to ban smokers from so-called public places - many of which are in fact privately owned businesses - is rejected by non-smokers. In a survey of over 1300 non-smokers 67pc agreed that provision should be made for smokers in the workplace, restaurants, pubs, planes and trains. So, there is no war raging between smoker and non-smoker. In fact both get along in their millions peacefully every day as partners, work colleagues, friends and relatives, all striving for that middle ground. It is the anti-smokers who blow the pipes of war. Let's all work together to defeat their bigotry. Martin Ball

Information Officer

Forest

Audley House, London.

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.